Case 6021466/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Taylor v Coronita Limited DEFAULT — 2026
- Case reference
- 6021466/2025
- Decision date
- 3 August 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Self
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Taylor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn a default judgment approved on 3 August 2026, Employment Judge Self found Mr B Taylor’s claim for a redundancy payment against Coronita Limited well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay £5,040.84 for that claim.
The tribunal also found that Mr Taylor was wrongfully dismissed. After taking account of mitigation of loss during the notice period, it awarded £442.89 gross. The unpaid holiday pay claim was well-founded, with £170.51 awarded. The total sum payable under the judgment was £5,654.24.
The protected disclosure detriment claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospects of success.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £5,041 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Gross award after taking account of mitigation of loss during the notice period. | Upheld | — | £443 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £171 |
| Whistleblowing | The protected disclosure detriment claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,654
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- No reasonable prospects of success
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.